2008/9/14 Donald Chai <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > On Sep 14, 2008, at 3:02 AM, Johannes Wegener wrote: > >> I recently read that awesome is going to use XCB over Xlib and says that >> it is faster becouse it is asynchronous. >> Does XCB realy its job faster than Xlib? >> And if this is the case is dwm going to use XCB in any further release? > > IMHO, asynchonicity probably only matters if you're using a bloated app over > a slow (network) connection. Since you're probably running your window > manager on your local machine, I'm not sure this will help dwm.
I agree. > What would make dwm fast is really to minimize the number of Map and Expose > events, so e.g. you don't render a Firefox window if it's unnecessary (cf. > changeset 1355). > > Some people mentioned that mouseresize is really slow in dwm. The following > patch removes resize requests that have not been handled before making a new > one. For the benchmark of "hold down mouse button and move pointer wildly", > it does great. I'm sure it probably breaks something else though... The problem with this approach is, that it will only filter the events on the dwm side, but the X server might still send a similar amount of expose events to the clients themselves, unfortunately. So the safest way is to increase keeping the server grab to a value which is still sufficient for client updates, but with better performance. That's the optimal solution I have in mind, though it's tricky to adjust. Kind regards, --Anselm
